DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum How would YOU fix the team?

NRTU

I have come to think that this season was one where evaluations were to be made. The signs were all there.

Giving up draft choices for next year is not the sign of a team ready to make a push.

Taking a wait and see on Weeden made sense, although none of us were happy with the outcome.

Trading Richardson was in retrospect a good move, depending on the replacement.

So the search will be first and foremost for a QB. The best plan will not be successful unless a QB is found.

Stat of the day... Green Bay is 2-4-1 without Rogers.... so that is the difference between a good and bad team.

Think Little has any trade value whatsoever? Somebody needs a designated dropper, I am sure. Downfield blocking is OK, just don't target the man if it matters. Needs to achieve for me to believe if we keep him.

Yeah, yeah. What would Bill Walsh know about it?

Just a bunch. That quote is quite an insight. And if your big play hands people don't catch, the system matters little to not at all (pun is freakin' intentional). The first job is making them want to catch the bloody ball. We don't seem to be too concerned with end zone drops enough from Gordon on down. Just too casual when compared to say Cruz and Welker IMO. And most of the NFL. Irksome.

Browns LB D'Qwell Jackson realizes the business of Joe Banner means the end for him is very near

The Morning Kickoff …

The numbers game: The current Browns regime headed by CEO Joe Banner and approved by owner Jimmy Haslam is all about numbers. These guys don’t look into a player’s soul. They look at his numbers.

And when they look at linebacker D’Qwell Jackson, these are the pertinent numbers they see when projecting their team for 2014:

Jackson will be 31 and in his ninth season with the Browns. Under his current contract, Jackson would carry the fifth-highest salary cap figure on the team -- $8.1 million. That figure is derived from a base salary of $2.6 million, the $1.4 million pro-rated portion of Jackson’s peviously-paid $7 million signing bonus, and, most importantly, a $4.1 million roster bonus due at the start of the 2014 NFL calendar year.

Nothing rankles Banner more than a bad player contract. Or, rather, a player-friendly contract. Jackson’s most recent contract agreed to by Tom Heckert prior to the 2012 season is one of the reasons Heckert was fired by Banner as GM.

There has been a lot of talk leading up to the season finale in Pittsburgh about the futures of free agents-to-be Alex Mack and T.J. Ward. Those players are just entering their prime. Banner may entertain some discussion about bringing them back.

Jackson’s fate most likely has been decided. As the days count down to Sunday, the reality is starting to sink in that the Pittsburgh game very well could be Jackson’s last in a Browns uniform.

“As far as I know, I’m here,” Jackson said to me, glumly. “But I know the business. I’m getting older. I signed a contract with a different regime. You think about those things. But, end of the day, I can only deal with what I can. If things change, I have to deal with it.”

Looking into the soul: In September, when the season was young, Cincinnati coach Marvin Lewis was asked about the Browns’ defense.

“I think they’ve got really explosive pass rushers. We’ll start there,” Lewis responded. “And that No. 52, he keeps playing. The guy’s played in so many different defenses. He’s probably one of the more unheralded great players in the league. You’ve got to be in this division to know how great he is.”

With a lead of 13 over safety Ward entering the final game, Jackson is all but assured to finish first on the Browns’ defense in tackles for the fifth time in his eight seasons. Two of those seasons were cut short or eliminated entirely by a pair of torn pectoral muscle injuries. The other season, Jackson’s first, he finished second in tackles.

When I asked defensive coordinator Ray Horton about Jackson, this is what he said:

“D’Qwell has been a coach’s dream as far as leadership, intelligence. He demands a lot from himself and his teammates. He really is a locker room coach (with) some of the things he says after the game and at halftime.”

I asked if Horton felt Jackson had enough gas in his tank to play inside linebacker in his defense at a high enough level.

“I’m not sure exactly where we are snap-count wise, but we’re up there in total snaps,” he answered. “Would I like to take some snaps off of his body going forward? Yes I would, but he takes great care of himself. It’s important to him. He’s well-conditioned mentally and physically. Would I like to see him take more snaps? No, this business, it’s a young man’s business, and I’m sure he understands that. He’ll train and recuperate, I’m sure, appropriately for him, but we want to get less snaps, less reps on our guys.”

Here are some numbers for Banner to consider: At the age of 30, Jackson has logged 1,085 snaps on defense this season. That happens to be 100 percent of the team’s defensive snaps. In other words, he has never left the field on defense. Cornerback Joe Haden is second on the Browns’ defense with 1,051 snaps and safety T.J. Ward is next with 1,050.

Snap counts are like innings pitched for major league pitchers. Those who can grind inning after inning, play after play, are appreciated most by teammates and coaches.

Only two linebackers in the NFL have logged more snaps on defense than Jackson – Chad Greenway of Minnesota has 1,092 and DeMeco Ryans of Philadelphia has 1,090.

Besides just showing up, Jackson’s enlarged leadership role this season has been the essence of him as a player.

“I’ll tell you what, Romeo Crennel told me something that will last with me forever and I pass it on to young guys,” Jackson said to me. “The decision-makers, they can always put a limit on your skill level. But you can’t put a number to leadership. And I tell young guys, if you’re a good locker room guy, a good character guy, you do the right things, people want to be around you, you’ll stick around and play this game. Whether it’s for one organization or the next, there’s a home for you.”

So close and yet so far: When the Browns won three games in a row to rise to 3-2 and get everyone’s hopes up, Jackson heard from Browns kicking legend Phil Dawson.

“He was so happy for us,” Jackson said. “That’s who I’m playing for. I’m playing for the guys I wish were still here. Phil is a Cleveland Brown. When you mention Phil Dawson, it’s out of respect. I want to be mentioned that way.

“There’s something to where you start your career and have those ups and downs, and you’re able to have success, especially late in your career. There’s something special about that. He’s winning, but I guarantee you if he had a choice between winning here and in San Francisco I think he’d choose here.”

There is nobody in the Browns locker room – nobody – who wants to see the Browns win more than D’Qwell Jackson. Nobody was more invigorated by that three-game win streak than him. For the first time, he felt what good quarterback play (by Brian Hoyer) could do for the team and for the defense.

Jackson knows that if the QB position can be stabilized, the Browns are good enough elsewhere to compete for the playoffs. He swears to that. But will he be around to see it?

“I understand I’m getting older,” Jackson said. “Guys are coming up. You’ve got to compete with 22-year-olds. I’m up for that challenge. But at the same time, I understand the business of it.”

This week we learned the Browns were scrapping a near 40-year relationship with the Cleveland Clinic, a Cleveland institution, for a more lucrative sponsorship deal with University Hospitals.

Now, does anyone think Jackson has a chance of seeing that $4 million roster bonus?

http://espncleveland.com/common/more.php?m=49&action=blog&r=17&post_id=26971

__________________________

I'm not necessarily in favor of giving him the outright boot from the team but I don't think his value is as high in a 3-4 as it is a 4-3. Hopefully Banner approaches Jackson about a re-structuring for one more year.

if banner axes DQ, i'm done.

they have 3 players right now they need to address. mack, ward and DQ. they need to be keeping all 3, but you get rid of our general on defense?

and replace him with who?

they better not screw this up.

Quote:

---

The current Browns regime headed by CEO Joe Banner and approved by owner Jimmy Haslam is all about numbers. These guys don’t look into a player’s soul. They look at his numbers.

---

Who the heck wrote this article? What proof does he/she have to make such a wild statement?

This sounds like something Grossi would write. It sounds like another lame attempt to bash the FO.

Two sides to this story and they go like this:

DQ should stay for so many reasons. He's our best ILB we have and we already need one, cutting him would mean totally rebuilding the core of the D. Also, cutting him would mean another 4.2mil dead money cap hit. This is DQ's leverage.

I understand that 8mil is a lot for him. His extension looked ok when it was made, but strangely the FA market has actually gone down since, which explains all those one year contracts last offseason, as many FAs didn't get what they thought they could land going off of past FA periods. Ellerbe was considered the best ILB last offseason in terms of age/talent and got 7mil/year. Dansby, who compares to DQ in age/talent, only got a one year contract worth 2.25mil. That's Banner's leverage.

Long story short: DQ would struggle to get 8mil in FA now and I'm sure he and his agent realize that, but from an on and off field and even cap money perspective it makes a lot of sense to keep DQ. So, both sides should have some interest to talk about reaching some kind of "middle ground".

Most probably, they will try to split up that 4mil roster bonus into some kind of highly unlikely bonus incentives like making the ProBowl and/or making the POs, so that DQ would "save face" and still make that money if he plays up to it. That would be basically a one year deal though and I'm not sure DQ's agent would agree to that, maybe if DQ pushes him to make it. It'd be a one year deal, because starting from 2015 his base salary goes way up and he would make 7+mil as a 33/34yo. Since it would cost no dead money cap hit then to cut him, he'd get cut for sure. So, long term DQ could probably get a better deal, with more guaranteed money somewhere else.

I hope we keep him and work something out, since I would really like to see him stay a Brown for his entire career. Same goes for Rubin btw, he's another big contract (8,175mil) and would cost less dead money (1,375mil) to cut him, but Rubin is younger and plays in the trenches, where contracts are valued higher. I hope we re-sign him for another long term deal.

I kind of suspect DQ, and especially Rubin, to be asked to take a pay cut.

Horton made some interesting comments about DQ in his latest presser, regarding his age and "how much gas is left in the tank" - and ultimately he said he'd like to limit the snaps given to DQ, and the other "older people... veterans".

I didn't think DQ was slacking or showing the effects of being old or not having any juice left.

I agree with your points, DJ.

Cutting DQ would create two holes at ILB while eating a ton of dead money. That's why I am in favor of a re-structuring of his contract.

Man, you totally hate the front office. You are so obvious.

J/C ....

I don't think that the team is going to be in a position where they must make decisions based solely on age or player cost exclusively next year.

Honestly, I have no idea how they see DQ. I have always seen him as more competent than impact player, but that may be what they want inside on their defense.

As far as Rubin, he will be into the final season if his contract next year. He is a very good DE, in any front, and is a tackle machine, but I think that his position on the team will be determined by the development of Winn and Armonty Bryant.

On the topic of dead money, Weeden is likely to represent $4.2 MM of dead money next year instead of a salary cap hit of $2.2 MM. Just an FYI. We still have a ton of cap space for next year... enough to re-sign Mack and Ward AND, if they wanted to, sign Cutler, but dead money will pile up next season.

Also, if they cut BOTH Weeden and Campbell, it will be a net Cap Impact of roughly $0.

Trent is on the books for ~$6.6 MM next year. Those are the major dead money items.

I see no reason to dump Campbell next year. He is a top quality backup QB, and good enough to win games with a good team.

Quote:

---

enough to re-sign Mack and Ward AND, if they wanted to, sign Cutler, but dead money will pile up next season.

---

I prey they don't want to. Cutler is the same guy now he's always been, which is a few great throws followed by terrible ones. He's a poor version of Jeff George except he'd cost top-dollar for middling returns.

Cutler isn't a way to fix this team.

Just a taste of how he's viewed over in Chi-town:

Jay Cutler is forced to prove his worth when it matters.

He didn’t come close to proving anything in Philadelphia. With a playoff berth begging to be clinched, Cutler completed 20 of 35 for 222 yards, a TD and a pick, and a quarterback rating of 73.8.

At one point in the first half, the Eagles had 149 yards and Cutler’s offense had four. Yes, four.

The happy and potentially revealing by-product is Cutler’s opportunity to prove it against the Packers with the NFC North title and a playoff spot still at stake.

Be clutch or be gone.

If he stinks against the Bears’ biggest rival the way he usually does, then the Bears should have serious concerns about using even the franchise tag, not to mention spending Tony Romo-Matthew Stafford-Unmet Potential money.

But if Cutler gives the Bears the game they need in a situation they must have, then their Hope-O-Meter pushes into plus territory.

This isn’t Jay Cutler vs. Josh McCown. This is Cutler vs. the money. Cutler vs. a Super Bowl quarterback.

This season always has been about Cutler. He was coming out of contract as he was walking into a new offense constructed by a quarterback whisperer. Could Marc Trestman develop Cutler into the franchise quarterback that general manager Phil Emery believes he is.

He is a stock. An IPO with a cannon arm. Is he worth the price?

Cutler has never had this kind of coach and these kinds of weapons entering a game against the Packers. He should fare better. He should be terrific, in fact. That’s the idea.

But if he isn’t, then why bother going further, especially at that price?

Remember, too, Emery believes playoffs are a regular expectation. He fired a coach because he failed to reach the postseason regularly. It follows that re-hiring a quarterback at an elite cost would involve that criterion, as well.

The defense isn’t going to magically improve. The Bears remain a team forced to outscore its own defensive ineptitude. That starts with Cutler.

That’s what Sunday’s game is all about. In many ways, Bears-Packers for the division crystallizes an important aspect of Cutler’s value. This is the kind of game that gets you paid.

Or doesn’t.

web page

What does any of that have to do with "looking into his soul?"

You don't think that is a bit melodramatic? Goodness.

Banner doesn't look into the souls of his players. Please.

Anybody but derek carr/johnny manzeil in the first round

I started to read that and I thought DQ made the comment about "the soul of player" But that's not the case. The writer did.

Lots of holes in this story..

I am a huge Ohio State fan, but Roby absolutely stunk in coverage this year. He plays w/a huge cushion. He gives up so many underneath passes that it makes you wanna gag. I really think he is going to have to move to safety [not sure he is big enough] or play in a Tampa 2 defense that relies strictly on zone coverage. He's terrible in coverage.

Yeah. It's actually a very good topic, but the author's bias ruined what should have been a good read. He got the desired effect, I guess. Heck, one poster even said he would "be done" w/the Browns if they didn't keep DQ.

I was doing a lot of yard work today and I was thinking about DQ's contract. It is an interesting topic. Let's look at it objectively.

--It seems like the fans are split on this guy. Look at some recent threads. DQ is getting blasted by some folks as a weak link. They say he can't cover. They say he is too weak. They say he makes all his tackles way down the field. They say he is a 4-3 guy. They say he is getting old. On the other hand, there are those of us who like him. We think he has good speed. We think he gets good depth on his drops. We think he is good in this particular type of 3-4 defense. We think he is a leader. We want to keep him.

--Not sure anyone wants to keep him if the Browns pay him $8 million a year, though. And his detractors would have a cow. Banner would be called an idiot. They would say, "why are you looking at his soul and ignoring the numbers?!?"

--My question is this for Grossi [I looked it up and it was Grossi who wrote the article.] Why is this focus on Banner? Why the comparison w/the Cleveland Clinic? Wasn't Banner smart for getting more money from University Hospital? Does the Cleveland Clinic have more "soul" than University Hospital? Why not focus on what Heckert did? Well Tony, I will do it for you.

--Was Heckert a complete moron for giving DQ, who will be 31, a contract that would pay him $8.1 million w/a $4.1 million roster bonus? Or, was Heckert thinking that he probably wouldn't keep DQ around to see that lucrative back end of the contract? I don't know the answer to those questions, but I sure would like to understand why Heckert made such a stupid move.

--So, what is Banner supposed to do? Should he look deep into DQ's soul? Should he ignore the numbers? Should he keep him around to prove what a nice guy he is and tell his owner that money is not a concern? Age is not a concern? It's not about money and production. It's about "looking into a player's soul." LOL Tony. Really? Are you kidding me? Seriously?

--I hope that DQ will agree to restructure his contract. I am not a contract guy. I don't know what is possible and what isn't possible. Perhaps one of our more intelligent posters can explain this part in regards to what is plausible. However, it would be nice if we keep DQ here. Many people will be upset if we keep him at even a reduced rate, but I think that DQ is still a good player and it would help the team if he stays. But, I don't think it should be for $8.1 million. I hope Banner and DQ's reps work out a deal where he stays here for a more team-friendly rate.

--I will have no problems w/DQ if he doesn't want to take less money and instead test free agency. However, I am not going to listen to a twit like Grossi paint Banner in a negative light because he looks at the numbers rather than "looking into a man's soul."

i'm the one that said i'd be done. why don't you just say it?

and rightfully so. banner has 3 positions he needs to adress. DQ's contract, Ward and mack.

if he lets all 3 of them walk, then what vers? mack damn sure does deserve top center money. ward deserves top 10 safety money. and DQ? he is the anchor of our Defense. so at the worst, they need to restructure his contract.

i mean, you guys are all like "yea he's overrated" or "he isn't worth 8 mill", so then if those 3 walk, who do you replace them with?

and THAT'S why i have a problem with banner if he lets ANY of those guys walk. those 3 positions are golden, we don't need anybody there. so why create holes, burying us FURTHER into the talent race within our own damn division. those 3 guys are starters, and would start on the majority of other teams. so who do we replace them with? hopes in dreams in the draft?

i'm tired of us trying to be safe all the time with money. maybe we should pay the players on our team that deserve to be paid. instead of trying to be cheap.

lets be cheap, all the way to another losing season. maybe we should work on developing talent around those guys, instead of getting rid of the few good players we have.

Did you not understand a word I was saying in regards to DQ? You are getting too emotional. If your done.......then you are done. What's the big deal?

The three guys:

--I thought I explained myself in regards to DQ. Try reading it w/out all the emotion.

--Mack: I think we should try to keep him. I just wonder if he wants to be here.

--Ward: If he only wants top 10 safety money, I would be okay w/us keeping him. I don't think he is a top 10 safety, but I realize that you always pay more for current contracts, just like we did last year w/Kruger and Bryant. However, what makes you think that Ward only wants top 10 money? I have maintained that if he wants top 3 or 4 money...you gotta let him walk.

I am not saying you have to agree w/me. So, why do you get so bent out of shape about this stuff? It's simply a discussion.

We have currently about $23 million in cap space for next year after (mostly Trent's) dead money. That is with DQ on the books for $8 million.

We have either an additional $12 million or $25 million in cap rollover for next year (I'm not sure if previous year's cap rollover goes into the calculation).

Even if we pay Ward and Mack $8 million each, we have plenty of cap room to keep DQ. It's just a matter of if they want to. Only $1.4 million is signing bonus hit. $4.1 million is roster bonus, which can be renegotiated. Salary is $2.6 million, which can be dropped to about a million or so for a 9-year vet. Looks like there is up to about $5.5 million in cap wiggle room to keep him on the roster, but he would effectively be playing for $1 million (cap hit $2.4 million) instead of $6.7 million (cap hit $8.1 million). If they try to lowball him that far down, he might just prefer they release him.

Cap space is not an issue. It's just a matter of how much cash are they willing to give him.

Would you pay him $8 million?

It ain't my money.

I don't see his contract as preventing us from adding a difference maker. He's not having a practical impact on our cap.

I think he is a positive influence on a team that has few.

I'm finishing up some performance reviews at work, and the person with the best score isn't the best individual contributor. It's the person who has done the most to positively impact the performance of each of the team members. Overall, that adds more value to my team. The high individual performers are still getting good scores, but honestly they are more replaceable than the person who keeps on top of the legitimate training and vocalizing/anticipating issues that will face the group.

I don't know for sure that DQ is a positive influence and hard working example , but he has been portrayed as such. That on itself has real value, and cutting him could have real negative impact to the habits and performance of his more talented teammates.

I like DQ. I don't think he should be paid that high, though.

His teammates? I hear you, but look at them. They freaking quit this year.

I am going to trust Banner on this one. His specialty in Philly was managing the cap. The Eagles were contenders for many, many years because of his smart business decisions. I'm sorry, but I too, prefer numbers over looking into a football player's soul.

Quote:

---

His teammates? I hear you, but look at them. They freaking quit this year.

---

Yeah, I agree that leadership was lacking this year.

As far as how much a guy makes, I don't care until we have to make cap decisions.

Banner has a plan and he's sticking to it. When Banner took over, he looked over his roster and he knew it wasn't ready to go to the playoffs. His plan for 2013 was to evaluate the roster, implement schemes and make a splash in 2014. Banner knew that trading away draft picks in 2013 would be unpopular. He knew that conserving free agent money would be unpopular. He knew that trading Trent Richardson would be unpopular. All of these moves were to make the team better when he believed he would have a chance. His rookie head coach would be allowed to learn on the job and gain experience. I will be absolutely shocked if we don't have a big off season of signings and have a productive draft with players selected that were scouted by the scouts that he put in place for the schemes they would be running. Banner's plan did not include winning in 2013. I think Banner has made more good moves than bad ones and no GM running the Browns in the last decade can say that. I think there is going to be huge excitement heading into 2014 locally and nationally and all the Browns have to do is win and we'll have some fun.

Banner and Lombardi must take some of the blame for the failures of this season. They did not have a very good impact on the 2013 season. Really did next to nothing to improve the team. If their plan is all about 2014 then they need to be held accountable for the results of next season.

Positive Moves

Signed Paul Kruger, Desmond Bryant, Brian Hoyer, Quentin Groves and Gary Barnidge.

Drafted Armonty Bryant

Trading Trent Richardson for a 2014 1st round pick.

Trading a 2013 4th and 5th round picks for 2014 3rd and 4th.

Negative Moves

Missed on Free Agents Kevin Barnes, Kellen Davis, Chris Owens, Shayne Graghm, Jason Campbell, and David Nelson,

Missed trading Brian Sanford trade to Seattle for John Moffitt and then cut Sanford.
Missed trading a draft pick to Miami for Devone Bess

Let free agents Phil Dawson and Josh Cribbs walk.

Drafted Leon McFadden 1 spot in front of Tyrann Mathieu

While Barkavious Mingo is not a bust there were better more impactful players selected after him like Chance Warmack, Jarvis Jones, and Eric Reid.

The fiasco that was the kicking tryout held 1 week before the season started.

Signing every UDFA possible days before the season started instead of finding quality veterans.

That wasn't exactely what Haslam promised the Browns fans after he bought the team. Junior could have provided those results.

Overall I would have to give the a D- on the 2013 offseason and the results on the field have proven out how ineffective they were. 2014 MUST be an "A". or the new FO will be considered a failure.

I disagree on some of your Negatives.

--How is Jason Campbell a miss? He is playing better than our former #1 draft choice. We got him relatively cheap. How is that a miss?
'
--Owens was our nickel corner and while he wasn't great, he wasn't bad. And how do you count guys like Kellen Davis and Shayne Graham as misses? They were street bums that we took a shot on. Seems like you are being overly harsh.

--Trying to trade Sanford for Moffitt was a miss? How? Sanford is a guy we later cut. We didn't gain anything from the attempted trade, but how did we lose anything?

--The Bess trade was a miss? How so? The "Browns traded their fourth-round pick (No. 104) and fifth-round pick (No. 164) to the Dolphins for Miami's fourth-round pick (No. 111) and a seventh-rounder (No. 217)." How in the world is that a miss? We did get some production from Bess. We exchanged lower round picks for a proven WR. He did not play well, but he is better than someone who probably wouldn't even make the team and we still have him under contract.


--Josh Cribbs isn't doing anything. Dawson is having a good year, but so is Cundiff, and I bet he is cheaper.

--I would rather have Mingo than any of those guys. Did you really mention Jarvis Jones?


--The kicking fiasco? I don't think our kicker or our punter have been a problem all year. Care to provide some numbers that say otherwise?

I think you are reaching w/your analysis. Giving them a D- is absurd. The TRich trade alone blows away all those "negatives." Signing Hoyer and Campbell were positives. Trading Colt for a draft pick was a positive. Moving up in next year's draft was a positive.

Why "must" next year be an A? You have apparently forgot that Haslam has said that he believes in continuity. This isn't Junior's Browns. If fans like you wanna walk........then walk, but I think the days of the a hostile media and an ignorant fan base calling for mass changes are over.